Mako,

If Winchester had been interested in accurately describing their "new" rifle cartridges, rather than primarily just marketing them, we would have ended up with the 43 Winchester Center Fire and then the 40 Winchester Center Fire a few years later. I bet the latter would have failed given it was introduced after the original 1873 cartridge had a strong hold on the market.

Dave

Dave,
You of course are right, but the .44 WCF  does meet the marketing paradigm, instead of calling it a 43 Winchester.  However the 38 WCF is an enigma.  It doesn't seem to follow any naming convention or a marketing angle.  why make something seem LESS "powerful".

I like things to make sense and there is in fact an answer for everything.  The answer may not be what we expect and sometimes boils down to a clerical error or bad ad copy.  One of the things I learned years ago is that there really is a reason for everything, we just don't always have access to the information.

I have read that the 38 WCF was "introduced" by Winchester in 1874, but according to the Win 1873 production records there wasn't one produced until 1879 and not shipped until 1880.  I have no idea where the 1874 date came from (but it is probably from the most "ACCURATE" source of information there is, Wikipedia)  and that will be repeated over and over along with it being reposted on many sites.  My personal experience with wikipedia in a field I am actually considered to have expertise in, is that it is OFTEN factually wrong and since it is a crowd sourced data base the popular mythos of the day is what will be recorded and blindly defended without supporting facts or data.

I hear the "facts" as reported on various internet site repeated as a holy tautology, "well I read it on _________ fill in the blank".  Wikipedia while having some useful information is treated as a canonized work and must be accepted.

I believe that Colt's was the culprit.  They introduced the "Frontier Six Shooter" in 1877.  They would not use the .44 WCF cartridge designation and thus the .44-40 was "born".  .44-40 is a a type of homophone and could be included as a "confusable" because not only is it a homophone but numerically speaking 40 and 44 are very similar.  Try saying .44-40 three times and then immediately switch to .40-40.  I have a hard time, it would be very easy to get the wrong ammo or mix up the caliber you were talking about.  By the time Winchester produced the first 1873 in 38 WCF (and it was the first firearm sold in this caliber) the Frontier Six Shooter was a hit and probably helping Winchester's sales as well.  I can imagine the engineering/production/marketing meeting where they were trying to determine what they would call the cartridge.  I'm sure they were very aware that the 44 WCF was called .44-40 everywhere.  Isn't it interesting that Colt's followed the convention set by Winchester and called it a .38-40 after Winchester's 38 WCF?

I wonder if the meeting I described above was at a Denny's at 6am like the naming of .40 S&W happened with the S&W engineering team who had just worked all night to produce the first 10mm short pistols.  It was a last ditch effort  to try and assuage the FBI team that was at S&W trying to get out of the S&W 1076 contract and switch to SIG.  The team ran through a list of names, everyone making their arguments (the leader had been the "Centimeter" until reason prevailed and everyone agreed that was already takne by the wildcat and finally settled on the .40 S&W), surprisingly S&W marketing kept it after the FBI rejected their prototypes offered that morning and the S&W 4006 was born.  And, before you jump in, yes I know the tales of Paul Liebenberg and Whit Collins who worked on the original High Power converted to 40 G&A (therein lies the tale of the Jeff Cooper association with Dornaus and Dixon (Bren 10).  But Tommy Campbell would tell you that while the attributions to Whit and Paul need to be made they did not make the original .40 S&Ws.  ALSO, I love how Steve Melvin (president of course) is given the credit, typical...

Wouldn't that be COINCIDENCE?  The .40 S&W name being born at a meeting with most of the name submissions (10mm types) being thrown out as confusing and perhaps the same happened at Winchester?  Oh... to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting.  I know what happened 34 years ago with the .40 S&W, but I long to know what happened with the 38 WCF.

~Mako

The first cartridge was the .38 Colt for use in 1851 and 1861 conversions.  The name was based on the diameter of the bullet.  It was later renamed the .38 Short Colt.

The next cartridge in the series was the .38 Long from UMC.  It was a .38" heeled bullet cartridge with the case lengthened to allow more powder capacity and was developed by UMC for Colt's Newline revolvers and centerfire conversions of the 1851 and 1861 Colt revolvers requested by the US Navy.  Because it was developed for this contract was also known as the .38 Navy.

The came the .38 Long Colt. It was used in the Colt M1892 revolver.  This black powder cartridge was internally lubed.  As such the diameter of the bullet was now the same as the inside diameter of the case and not the outside.  Its bullet diameter was now .357".  The case of the .38LC was 0.14" longer than the .38L to allow the case to cover the lube grooves and still have the same overall length and powder capacity.  This was also known as the .38 Army.

Frisco,
I'm still not sure about the .38 Colt and the .38 Long. My understanding is that the conversions were actually .38 Colt which started out as a .88" long case which was truly a heeled bullet design with a Ø.375 Groove diameter and then morphed into the longer 1.03" case which at some point they called the "Long Colt".  I think part of the problem with identifying the actual cartridge type is that Colt's stamped their revolvers as ".38 Colt".  I believe the .38 Short is only .755" long.  I have read where 1877s were said to use the original .88" cases and then later the 1.03 LC length cases, but I have never researched it.  I really haven't spent much time studying the double action 19th century revolvers like the '77, .78 and '92.

However the 1851 and 1861 Conversions whether actually from Colt's or secondary gunsmiths do interest me and they definitely used heeled bullets of ≈ Ø.375.  and they were truly .38s.  I know the U.S. Navy actually had some 1861s and 1851's converted, (several thousand between both models).  I've actually handled one 1861 Conversion and the chambers appeared shorter than a .38 Long Colt (but I didn't have anything to measure with and probably would have been slapped nekid if I had stuck anything down a chamber.)  I know it is reported that the Colt's conversions for the Navy were chambered in .38 Long Colt, but I tend to take anything concerning .38 Colt, .38 Long and .38 LC as "reported" without some measurements being offered.  Because it was a heeled bullet you could probably stuff an LC into a chamber that was intended for a .88" case.  And you can definitely chamber a non-heeled .38 Long Colt into one which is probably how some people "verified" the chambers they were measuring was a .38 LC chambering  (that's pretty weak...)

SAAMI specs for a .38 LC throat are Ø.3585 +.004/-.0000, I know for fact they couldn't "convert" a true '51 or '61 cylinder to that smaller diameter because it started out as a Ø.375 to Ø.378 chamber mouth.  The cylinder I looked at basically looked like it was opened up slightly to maybe Ø.381 to Ø.383 and there was basically no tapered throat, just the remnant of the original bore for the percussion revolver ball or bullet.  There was a small constriction, but I would love to actually get real dimension from one.

It is an interesting study in marketing psychology as to why they continued to use the ".38" designation on later revolvers when they were truly .36 caliber and .44 caliber for revolvers that were/are .43 caliber.

This is one of the reasons the .38 WCF befuddles me. why would they name the cartridge as a much smaller caliber?  Well, it was a rifle company and my only theory is that they were worried about confusion with the .44WCF.

Any more information about the differences between the .38 Colt, .38 Long and .38 Long Colt would be appreciated.  I'm familiar with the differences between them and the .38 Short Colt, I'm not asking about that.  Do you know any more about the case length change from .88" to 1.03", and were there ever any heeled bullets loaded in the longer case (also revolvers chambered for the LC case but needing a Ø.375 heeled bullet for a Ø.375 groove?  There is

Regards,
Mako

If'n the ones in the cages stay healthy, we can always eat the spares!  Picks up a large coop of birds and adds it to the pot.  If we deep fry 'em, toss 'em in hot sauce and call 'em Bufflo Wings!    By the way, anyone know how to carve Coyote.   

Let's start with the 1851 Colt.  It was a .36 caliber pistol because the convention was to use the bore size of .36".  The groove was about .375" and the cylinder bore diameter was .380" (this is for originals not modern copies). So far so good?  Now, when cartridge conversions came about, the rear of the cylinder was milled off and than was it.  The cartridges used heeled bullets so the case diameter, the bullet, and the cylinder bore were all .38". 

The first cartridge was the .38 Colt for use in 1851 and 1861 conversions.  The name was based on the diameter of the bullet.  It was later renamed the .38 Short Colt. 

The next cartridge in the series was the .38 Long from UMC.  It was a .38" heeled bullet cartridge with the case lengthened to allow more powder capacity and was developed by UMC for Colt's Newline revolvers and centerfire conversions of the 1851 and 1861 Colt revolvers requested by the US Navy.  Because it was developed for this contract was also known as the .38 Navy.

The came the .38 Long Colt. It was used in the Colt M1892 revolver.  This black powder cartridge was internally lubed.  As such the diameter of the bullet was now the same as the inside diameter of the case and not the outside.  Its bullet diameter was now .357".  The case of the .38LC was 0.14" longer than the .38L to allow the case to cover the lube grooves and still have the same overall length and powder capacity.  This was also known as the .38 Army.

After the .38 Long Colt came the S&W .38 Special.  The case was again lengthened to 1.15" and reduced in diameter to .379".  It was transitional in that it was introduced just before smokeless became common and was loaded with smokeless soon after it introduction.

Next came the Remington .357 Magnum.  The case was lengthened again and was a true smokeless cartridge.

   YEPPER 

YESSIREE ... BOB.  PLASTICS could be a real serious boon or is it Boom.  There is a Canadian out fit has developed a process for making Building Blocks that are sort of like Lego(tm) blocks.  Primary material is recycled plastics.  Any color, ground up fine and mix'd with a touch of concrete.  Strong as hell, cheaper than building a house with wood, and with packaging, an endless supply of raw material.  Good tip there MAKO.  May have to think an investment.

I also have a real nifty set of .45 Conversions, built on 1860esque Pietta frames.  Currently have three separate barrel sets for 'em.  Set 'em up with ACP Cylinders so I could shoot ACP cases and C45S cases interchangeably.  Works a treat and loaded with 130Gr Barnstormer bullets, recoil is on par with Suppository .38s.  Super FUN!!